1963 ZO-6. For Vetterans Only.

[Sydney G.]

Hi all.
In researching and recording my '63 list, or "registry" as it now seems to have become in a very big way, there are very many interesting facts and entries. There are also many questions in regard to factory production sequence and also to the reality of there being so many claims of FI cars now being in existence in proportion to the total data compiled. But, we will leave all of that for later. Benefit always goes to the owner!

My BIG question or challenge tonight to all of you long-toothed '60's car guys is:
Has anyone of you ever seen a REAL 1963, ZO-6, factory produced Roadster?
They are said to have been produced, I believe them to have been made, there are claims of them being out there, yet there is much skepticism!!
I do not mean Dealer produced ZO-6's!
I'm looking for any evidence at all of the real deal.
Someone, has to remember or actually bought one of these rare beasts!
Any and all input is deeply appreciated.

Let's at the very least try and put this question to rest!!

Thank you to all those members who were extremely kind to take their valuable time and respond to the "registry". I'll put out another call soon after I have recovered!
Syd

[Loren L.]

Excuse me for not having heard of the

Syd Garber ZO-6 Registry, but I have only been around the hobby since 1964. The answer to your question is "Yes"..

[Duke W.]

FYI - it's Z-06 not ZO-6 *NM*

[Sydney G.]

Re: Excuse me for not having heard of the

Loren,
Thanks for your reply!
It seems that there are quite a few who are in doubt as to the ZO-6 roadster ever actually having been built by the factory at all!
From the data that I have so far compiled, evidence supports this claim in my opinion without a doubt. The history that I have read speaks for itself. If one wanted to order a ZO-6 optioned convertible in the mid-production time frame of 1963, I do not doubt that your local Chevy dealer would write you up.

Loren, what is your evidence? Did you see a '63 ZO-6 roadster as new? Own one? Have you seen the actual dealer invoice or window sticker?
I'm sure that Bob Jones, composer and author of the recently released ZO-6 Registry would be appreciative!
Perhaps we can put the skepticism to rest.
There are ZO-6 roadster owners out there that would no doubt love the support!
If you have documentation to support your claim or if other Vetterans would step forward, then maybe we could prove once and for all that this is a dead issue.
For me though, just your word Loren is proof enough!!!!

The Syd Garber ZO-6 Registry? It does have a nice ring to it! Thank you!
But no!

My "personal list" of 1963 Corvettes has been compiled through many, many, many hours of time and effort, calls, referencing, cross referencing, auditing, evaluating, and just plain hard work for over 10 years! Actually pushing 12 years!
This passion for knowledge of the history of the 1963 Corvette has led me to many interesting and wonderful people, historians, past owners, present owners, true Corvette enthusiasts and numerous kind members like you. They are all friends and I thank each and every one!

The list, now nearing info in one form or the other on 1,300 cars from 1963 production, is not a ZO-6 Registry but rather an information data compiled with the goal of determining final paint production totals as only 3 out of 7 color options were recorded for 1963. It was also started with the goal of determining , in estimate, how many '63's might haqve survived to this day! I also personally was and still am intererested in finding the 2 closest vins to my '63 coupe to see if they were built exactly the same. That would be interesting!
To compare engine component numbers with the sister vin to your car!
Loren, you have not have heard of a Syd Garber ZO-6 registry because in fact it does not exist. Refer to the Bob Jones registry. Or, the Larry Brooks '63 registry of the late '70's.
You might however, in the near future, hear a rumor of the Syd Garber 1963 listing!
Syd

[Sydney G.]

Re: FYI - it's Z-06 not ZO-6

You're of course right Duke.
Sorry for the numerous typo's. I do have a day job, at least I hope!
Syd

[Loren L.]

I was going to ask if this was the Larry

Brooks (N. Car.?) continuation survey - someone, somewhere has it. For your files, you can add coupe #10706, white/red, 4spd, 4.11 posi, L84, WSW, AM, delivered new to AF Lt in Mtn Home ID after he tired of waiting for the KO wheels, and CV #15018, Sebring Silver/Dk Blue, 2 tops (black
soft), AM/FM, 4.11 posi, 4 spd (Munice), L84, delivered new in LaFayette IN

[Dave Suesz]

Weird non-Corvette GM car production trivia...

In 1972 the Pontiac GTO was changed from a "model" to an "option". One unintended consequece of this was that two GTO station wagons were produced, according to factory records. Neither car is known to exist today. Rare enough?

[Rick A.]

Re: 1963 ZO-6. For Vetterans Only.

Syd,

Relative new-comer to the Corvette hobby. My thoughts:

1. Were you able to order the RPO Z06 on a 1963 Convertible?

Initially - NO. The reason I say this - the Vert did NOT have enough capacity/capability for the 36-gallon gas tank.

Later in production, when RPO Z06 "options" were AVAILABLE separately to be ordered - POSSIBLY. Now, the reason I say possibly, is that one could order RPO Z06 on either the Coupe or Vert. I don't have documented proof, but I have heard folks talk about their being a RUNNING CHANGE at GM that announced this fact.

2. Has anyone seen "A REAL 1963 Z06 FACTORY PRODUCED ROADSTER? I personally, have not. I know that at Hershey NCRS this past fall, that there "purportedly" was one that was there. This automobile SUPPOSEDLY was ordered/owned, etc. by some GM engineer or something. And was found and bought at some estate sale or something. I have heard no mention of DOCUMENTATION showing any information on this vehicle to be true?

I have also heard/seen Mershon and other "so-called" USED CAR dealers selling Verts as Z06's, both 1963 and 1964 models. I have questioned all of these because I believe that even though they may have had the dual-cylinder master, the big brakes, etc. - I DO NOT believe they are in fact what they claim to be.

Someone correct me here - the Z06 brakes are different in makeup somehow from the J56-optioned cars? Is this the correct option, as I sometimes confuse J-56 and J-65? Herein, I believe is where all of the confusion with the MYTH(?) of a Vert Z06.

Just my $.02 centavos - back to lurking mode

[Duke W.]

Re: 1963 ZO-6. For Vetterans Only.

From Corvette News Vol 6 No 3, page 12:

"Increasing customer requests to have the Special Performance Equipment Option available for both the Convertible and Sport Coupe led Chevrolet Distribution to announce the availablility of a revised option for both '63 models."

Of course, the "revision" to Z-06 was the unbundling of the big tank that would not fit in a Convertible (and KO wheels, which were ultimately not released during the '63 model run), and this occurred on or about Feb. 1, 1963. This "unbundling" just involved the big tank and KO wheels. The big tank became RPO N-03. KO wheels were already listed as a separate option, and this revision to Z-06 deleted P-48 wheels from the Z-06 package.

Notwithstanding the above and though '63 Convertibles with Z-06 equipment have been observed, I don't believe that unequivocal documentation of a St. Louis produced Z-06 Convertible has ever been produced. Unless and until a documented example of a Z-06 Convertible is unearthed, the question of whether St. Louis ever built a Z-06 convertible will not have a definitive answer, and this question has remained unanswered for the last 41 years, so don't hold your breathe thinking that an answer is right around the corner.

The HD brake system that was part of the '63 Z-06 package is identical to the '64 J-56 HD brakes, although there may have been some changes to shoe friction material from early '63. All the equipment that was part of the '63 Z-06 package, both early and late versions, was available as separate options in 1964. For the second version the only equipment that was unique to Z-06 was the HD brake package and HD suspension, F-40. The FI engine, four-speed transmission, and Positraction axle that were part of Z-06 were already available as stand-alone options.

As discussed in a recent thread, J-65, available in '63 and '64, was the "metallic brake" option that consisted of sintered metallic linings, specially finished drums using the base drum castings, and special heat resistant return springs. It was priced at a mere $37.70 in 1963, but increaed to $53.80 in '64.
J-65 shoes are the same as base brakes and, therefore, not interchangeable with HD brake shoes, but the J-56 and J-65 lining materials may have ended up the same.

Duke

[Joe R.]

Re: 1963 ZO-6. For Vetterans Only.

Syd,

The first Corvette I owned was a 1964 Convertible, White with Red vinyl interior with the following options. J-56 brakes, FI, 4.56 posi, Heavy duty suspension and close ratio 4 speed.

Found it in a junk yard in Pulaski Tenn and paid $250.00 with no motor or front end but the Judge gave me a front end from a 63. This was late 1969.

You can call this 1964 whatever you want but it had the STUFF for a Z-06 Convert. I only know of one other person ever seeing a 64 Convert like this one and he reads this board. Speak up Mike H.

Regards,

JR

PS. Some of you may remember the Judge in Pulaski, Tennessee.

[Joe S.]

Re: 1963 ZO-6. For Vetterans Only.

I have no documenation to prove it, but the weekend before last, when I went upstate to the meet with the guy going to paint my 63, there was a 63 CV claimed to be a Z-06. Unfortunately I didn't grab the vin off of it but am going back there. The frame was shot though and was in the process of being replaced. There was a lot of Bubba work had been previously done on the car. As an example, to replace/repair part of the frame, they had cut a whole through the floorpan from inside (duh!).

Sebring Silver with Black interior and Black Top
L84 (radiator support, 6500 redline)
The HD brakes were sitting there next to it, elephant ears and all.

The other unbelievable part of this story is that the guy who owns it also owns 93 Vettes. I did not see these with my eyes but was told I'd get a tour the next time I go up there. Included in the collection is one of the 20 67 L88's.

So, bottom line is I have nothing to prove any of this and what I saw was not substantiated. However, I will see what I can do to get more info and pictures next time I am there which currently would be in May to drop my 63's body off.

ps: Syd, I think you mentioned you have my info already for your listing. If not let me know. And have you come across any other White w Black interior FI's CV's. Someone had mentioned only 1 so far.




Joe and Joanne's 63 FI Convertible

[Michael S.]

Re: Weird non-Corvette GM car production trivia...

Dave,

I have heard the 72 GTO wagon story for years. I have heard they were made in Framingham Mass plant.

Where is this documented information concerning the production of these cars? While I have heard people say they were built, I have not seen anyone bring this documentation including PHS (Pontiac Historical Services). I along with a bunch of other Pontiac wagon guys would love to see this information.

I own a 72 wagon factory equipped with the "GTO" frontend or properly termed "sport" frontend. It was a $42.00 option. For $42.00 you got the GTO hood, endura bumper and fenders with the side extractors. The "Sport" frontend option was available in 71-72. I have the build sheet, title history and all original selling information . Nowhere does it say GTO on the build sheet so I do not claim to have one. It "does" have the GTO emblem in the grill, couldn't resist installing that!

I am not questioning your claim of documentation. I am excited it may exist and would like to see if you could "share" the information.

Mike
#11202

[Mike M.]

Re: 1963 ZO-6. For Vetterans Only.

Dukie: your last sentence is confusing to me, but then again i'm easily confused these days. anyway, the J-65 shoes on my 64 coupe aren't like the base brake shoes in that the former are muti-pucked lining per shoe core and the later are one piece shoe lining per shoe core. can see where the core of j-65 and base may well be the same. mike

[Duke W.]

Re: 1963 ZO-6. For Vetterans Only.

Technically the "shoe" is the steel weldment that the lining attaches to. GM refers to the assembly in the parts book as "shoe kit with facing".

As far as I know base and J-65 use the same shoe, but, of course, have different "facings" or what is also called "linings".

Back in the C2 era a typical "brake job" consisted of replacing the shoe assemblies with rebuilt shoes that had new facings/linings (usually) riveted onto the shoes. The old shoes were then turned in as cores and were rebuilt.

I expect that most J-65 cars that went into a commercial brake shop for a brake job got a set of rebuilt shoes with conventional linings, and the J-65 shoes that went back into the system were rebuilt with conventional linings. The only way to get the original type metallic linings was to buy new shoe kits from a Chevrolet dealership, which would have been a lot more expensive than a set of rebuilt shoes.

Mitigating this was the fact that the J-65 linings are exceptionally long lived, and once they were worn out the drums are usually near the wear limit, too. I know I've advised several owners with J-65 systems that were nowhere near the wear limit to rebuild the hydraulics and just clean up the J-65 drums and shoes and reinstall them; 100K+ miles life is not uncommon.

Duke

[Dave Suesz]

Not anymore...

Some years ago, now, a buddy of mine was a "Goat" enthusiast, had whole shelves of Pontiac stuff. I never owned a Pontiac, but I had the opportunity to drive many, such as 389 Tri-Power, 400 Ram Air, 455 HO, etc.